/bant/ - International/Random

That would entirely depend on who the person marries. Because in that case they mix their genetics together. So if they bred with a white... yes, they would be breeding out most of those attributes. Some could be persistent but the aggregate effect would be more caucasian genes

>>5759
There won’t be a permanent/long-lasting negative defect generations down the line like we see in many modern Spaniards who’s ancestors were raped by the moores?

It would be great to be able to help repopulate the white race, not negatively impacted it.

>>5758 (OP) 
Do you get a German Shepherd if you breed one with a Golden Retriever? What happens if you mate a mix with a mix? Of course, you never get a German Shepherd again. How much worse is it when a German Shepherd mates with a pitbull?

Naturally, a German Shepherd and a Golden Retriever mix is infinitely better than the alternative. However, you can quickly see why like should mix with like. Find someone with your similar mix, and stick with it.

Hopefully one day gene therapy technology can be in the hands of a righteous state and nation, so something can be done about this, but unfortunately that requires a nation run by German Shepherds or Golden Retrievers which is the opposite of the current trajectory. Plan likewise.

>>5761
I like your allegory, makes sense.

It’s tragic how in such situations, it’s extremely difficult to find a partner who is in your region, of parallel decent, has a good genetic disposition, has a good character and shares/is open to a close enough societal ideology.

Back to the dog breeding allegory, does it exactly reflect to humans in how you a mixed breed can combine the separate good(intellect, physical, etc…) genetics respective to both parents, giving at least some net positive? I ask this to broaden the realistic pool of partner people like me can get within their lifetime.

>>5762
^^  I apologize for any misspellings. Currently posting through phone.

>>5762
>>Back to the dog breeding allegory, does it exactly reflect to humans in how you a mixed breed can combine the separate good(intellect, physical, etc…) genetics respective to both parents, giving at least some net positive? 
This gets complicated quickly, as unfortunately as much as I'd want to give you a Disney answer, the truth of the matter is that being mixed often inherently introduces health problems not due to either (different) ancestors having bad genes themselves but because the mixing itself often introduces incompatibilities with the offspring. There's a list of potential health problems that occur; I'll name only a few that can be confirmed easily: blood incompatibilities of the offspring with the mother, autoimmune issues that can trigger related to this, skeletal differences between species make childbirth much more difficult or impossible (without artificial means) such as an Asian female frame with a much larger European baby, dormant fertility issues, etc. To make matters worse, sometimes these issues skip generations.

I've completely set aside and ignored cultural and sociological incompatibilities that arise from mixings, as these also often cause major psychological effects over time despite not being biological in nature.

Returning to your original question, the 'good' mixes still require a good base to begin with. A Golden Retriever and German Shepherd still produce beautiful, often loyal and well-behaved mixes. If a good mix recognizes what they are, they will look after their own interests as much as looking after German Shepherds and Golden Retrievers, knowing that a world without either is a dark one indeed. 

I don't have a good answer for a German Shepherd and pitbull mix, other than to tell them to also mix with their own kind at all costs. If they are good despite their genes skewing towards being bad due to the pitbull ancestry, yet find another good pitbull mix as a mate, it'd make sense these would form a new 'good' new sub-species over time if the chain was continued for a long enough time. Gene therapy and positive eugenics would vastly speed up this process in addition to ensuring its success (there's no guarantee the canine offspring would find another good mixed breed to continue the process otherwise).
>It’s tragic how in such situations, it’s extremely difficult to find a partner who is in your region, of parallel decent, has a good genetic disposition, has a good character and shares/is open to a close enough societal ideology.
Yes, this is extremely difficult for everyone these days. Dark times for all of us. On the other hand, if you exist, that means unquestionably a mate exists that's compatible with you. And that's a comforting thought. For me personally, I am a Golden Retriever / German Shepherd mix, and I've specifically made it my goal to find a similar mix as best I can for the medical reasons alone. Above all else, I'd say testing yourself and partner for any possible genetic diseases is priority, along with making sure your kids don't have any. 

I was going to post some actual medical literature with canines showing how mixes decrease the likelihood of certain diseases found in purebreds (due to inbreeding), yet introduce a wider range of new diseases not found in either parent while reinforcing diseases that exist in both breeds if the puppy is unfortunate enough to have two separate breeds both with bad genes but it looks like the sources keep getting taken down. It'll take some time for me to give you proper scientific sources on the matter.

>>5764
What would define a good “base” for predicting how well two individual mix? Would it be based on data such as the percentages of indo-euro steppe, neolithic/antalonia farmer, WHG, EHG, etc… that each of them have?

>>5760
You didn't get to decide who your ancestors bred with. You get to make the best decision based on the circumstances now. I know plenty of people who have black or native american genes in their great grandfathers line and they are for all purposes white. It's really about what life history strategy your genes put you on, and that determines whether you ultimately end up in one race or the other. 

You will probably carry a certain amount of those genes down. It's not something to agonize ober

>>5762
The fallacy of purityfags is thinking that the genetic race didn't undergo variations before. It was always in a process of gradual motion and gradual adaptation. Bad genes will face negative pressures and be weeded out, good ones will be amplified. And the allele frequency of the dominant race will eventually show up even in the admix. This fuss is so trivial at the individual level. Pick good genes, pick compatible races, there you go. One of the core fallacies of the WN camp is thinking "whites" (that's bullshit, there were already different european subspecies) reached their permanent zenith with the genes of about 1900. Ignore these faggots and do genetic mixes which will give you a good pack of cards, with the knowledge that if your child exists in a white mileau they are likely homogenize with time

>>5766
>What would define a good “base” for predicting how well two individual mix? 
In your case? I'm not the best judge. I'll try my best to give you a mixture of a scientific answer and my own opinion later. 

Your Indigenous American heritage percentage would strike me as the most likely to cause issues from a medical standpoint due to being the most separated from the other two, as they are originally from East Asia and Siberia (Paleo-Indians) after crossing the Bering Strait thousands of years ago. 
>Would it be based on data such as the percentages of indo-euro steppe, neolithic/antalonia farmer, WHG, EHG, etc… that each of them have?
Wouldn't hurt to go into specifics such as that if you want to pursue it, but I would think checking for obvious genetic disorders with testing between you and the girl you end up with would be priority. They can calculate the likelihood of inheritance in any children you have from this, even before you get to the stage of screening the child itself during pregnancy. Priority would be making sure your mate doesn't introduce any more wildly different genes to the mix, as much as possible-- and especially from racial groups which are most commonly disliked most since they'd be the least compatible / most foreign anyways. 

Maybe the Northern Asian thing from your ancestry is a hint of where to look?

My own definition of a good "base" would be examining the quality of the two parents' racial make-up in terms of historical record for contributions to civilization in the last few hundred years (Far East / Northern Asian / most Indigenous European ethnic groups have the best record), followed by the genes particular to their family history (hereditary disorders, physical attractiveness, athleticism, etc.), followed by socio-cultural compatibility (religion, politics, and so forth).

My own chud opinion would be to view everything from the lens of your children (and their children) above all else. Will they look significantly different from you and the type of culture / state / tribe you're wishing to be a part of? Will they fit in with that culture / state / tribe? Did you avoid obvious incompatibilities?

>>5762
Take their parents occupations, estimate their IQ, divide it by two. That's her IQ. Take yours and combine it by hers, and divide by two. That is your estimated child's intelligence. You can basically do this with every trait

Genetically very different pairings, like between races, are more likely to have decks of genes which were not tested to play well together. An admix can get traits which their pool doesn't normally have and that's valuable, but at the same time if they don't homogenize back into the original genome at some point they are probably going to have a bunch of jank genetic combinations because it's a novel pairing with selection.

As the earlier guy was getting at, things about genes could change dramatically in our lifetimes as crispr technology matures, designer babies become commonplace etc. The old forms of eugenics are quite dated

>>5769
I’ll steel man a purist prospecting. An important factor is one’s identity stems from both genetic make up AND ancestral continuity.

IE; someone who can see a clear line from which their paternal AND maternal ancestors originated from, their culture, conquests, religion, etc… may have a stronger/clearer idea of their identity compared to someone comprised of many European genetic lines because is harder to consolidate multiple identities. Even with us all sharing deep ancestry, our own splits make us.

>>5775
Actually I did think about it for a moment and I am kind of  simply wrong. Our recent evolutionary environment is very unnatural, we have virtually no negative selection at play at all. Poor Genes, or harmful genes can stay within a person indefinitely if they don't outright kill them. So probably if we compare to a Europid of the last century, our genes would probably simply be inferior...

Oh well. I tried eugenics in dating, it just shrinks your pool until there's nothing left. How many women are above 1sd and not crazy? Etc, etc. It is only feasible for people with large sums of money who can effectively buy women. It is almost inevitable that my child is stupider and more normie than I am, we are doomed to turn into homogenized piles of shit degenerating to lower IQ standards because of the foreigners

>>5777
>” It is almost inevitable that my child is stupider and more normie than I am”

Don’t doom. Ideas and action propagated from genetics AND people/culture. The bulk of my right winged ideology exposure actually came from my smaller more Indigenous American side of the family, while my White-Spanish side were liberal.

Genetic determinism is NOT absolute, and the proper raising of a child is just as important as their genetic makeup. I am NOT saying we should mix with non-euro’s who just so happen to share an ideological backbone, but we do need to wager between multiple factors outside of just the best genetic match.

>>5779
As an example of what a “non-pure”, but strong based genetic mixture collective with a proper shared culture can do, we can look to the Reconquista, where you have a indo-european Celtic, pre-indo-european Iberian, and slight germanic-visigoth mixed population as the winning fighting force. 

Of course there were mixtures to various degrees/ratios and when you look at the extremely successful Battle of Covadonga lead by Pelagius, you see that even he was of well mixed Iberian and Celtic decent.

>>5779
My prevailing theory is that the anglo-saxon/eurozone genetics are so badly feminized from years of socialist welfare statism that they are beyond saving. Pretty much everyone in the RW nationalist scene is part of the peripheral ethnics or admixed with a race that hasn't been reduced to children yet. Whites are obviously a people in decline due to their excessive tolerance and weakness

>>5771
>” My own definition of a good "base" would be examining the quality of the two parents' racial make-up in terms of historical record for contributions to civilization in the last few hundred years (Far East / Northern Asian / most Indigenous European ethnic groups have the best record), followed by the genes particular to their family history (hereditary disorders, physical attractiveness, athleticism, etc.), followed by socio-cultural compatibility (religion, politics, and so forth).”
>” My own chud opinion would be to view everything from the lens of your children (and their children) above all else. Will they look significantly different from you and the type of culture / state / tribe you're wishing to be a part of? Will they fit in with that culture / state / tribe? Did you avoid obvious incompatibilities?”

I absolutely see things from your chud perspective too. But with an added caveat. Each of a child’s paternal and maternal likes could be wildly different in culture from each other from the bronze-iron age to modernity, yet they can ultimately share the same deep ancestral genetics. Genetically, they are at a good spot, but identity-wised, how would they derive a clear identity from their many ancestral lineages, their cultures, beliefs, etc.. if not an exact one is super clear?

What I’m essentially asking is where does a good stock pan-European mutt derive their core identity?

>>5791
Following up, perhaps the best answer would be Paganism at as core spiritual identity and some form of neo-platonism as a broader intellectual construct. Paganism shares the same roots with many different indo-european peoples (and even mixtures with pre-indo-European peoples paganism(s)), so there is unifying, exclusively European truth and identity to be found there. And neo-platonism serves as the vehicle for the individual to consolidate how these differing, but deeply unified ideologies work within themselves.

It’s undoubtedly a more difficult path to pursue, but given our situation, it gives the opportunity for certain “euromutts” to evolve and ultimately be better for it. It’s difficulty also serves as a eugenics so the ones with the best bases come out on top.